Dude, those chickens aren't ready yet

It's not really news to state that the general media has already donned Barack Obama the great (audacious) hope of the youth of America. The crowning is obvious and expected; he's the youngest, the least old-white-man-ish, the one who uses those five dollar hyphenated terms college students are so inclined to casually insert into conversation: post-modern, anti-establishment, pro-democracy.

So the cool new candidate has been established, whoops, I mean to say he has been ushered into the minority spotlight by an urgently anti-government collective of new minds (or whatever). But are any of those new minds actually going to make it to the polls? My sources say no, and thank God for that.

Washington Post reported that, "The last time more than half of 18-to-24-year-olds voted in a federal election was 1968." Not surprising since even Mtv's Rock the Vote campaign, replete with celebrity hotties and star athlete endorsements election year after year, has been unable to mobilize youth voters past the primaries. And yes, 18-25 year-olds have turned out in record numbers to primaries this year. But will they put down the Doritos, Wii, or, heck, homework, on that fateful day in November long enough to scratch their heads and proclaim, "Hey! I'm supposed to be doing something today?" I think not.

But go ahead 18-25 year-olds, make my day. Just know that if you do vote, it's a vote for the man, whatever color and sex he appears to be.

Important update about the border fence

(quoted from Grassifre.org)

Our research team just got off the phone with one of our key contacts in Rep. Duncan Hunter's office and learned moredisturbing news about the border fence.

According to our contact, the fence-gutting provision that was put into the omnibus spending bill just before Christmas alsocauses the Department of Homeland Security's authority onconstructing new border fencing to expire at the end of this year.

In essence, the sun sets on the border fence on December 31 ofthis year! In fact, our contact tells us the bill languagecould be interpreted as a prohibition against any fence construction after December 31 of this year.

Here's the exact provision from H.R. 2764: "In carrying out this section, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall -- "(i) identify the 370 miles, or other mileage determined by the Secretary, whose authority to determine other mileage shall expire on December 31, 2008, along the southwest border where fencing would be most practical and effective..."

Think about what this means... The next President will have no clear legal authority to build any of the border fence at all. We will have a pro-amnesty president who not only doesn't want to build the double-layer fence, he or she legally does not have to!

As a result, this fall's elections could prove less important for border security than what you and I do right now to restore theSecure Fence Act. In three weeks, Ron De Jong and I will take part in a major press conference with Members of Congress on Capitol Hill to present your petition to Restore the Secure Fence Act.

Right now, we have 117,969 signers. We simply must have250,000 petitions in three weeks. Please forward this message to 10 or 20 friends today and ask them to join you in signing the petition to restore the Secure Fence Act. Click link below to sign:

http://www.grassfire.net/r.asp?u=5542&PID=15807924

Again, what you and I do NOW could prove more important for border security than the November elections.

Thank you so much for signing the petition and spreading the word.

Steve Elliott, President, Grassfire.org

If I Were a Black Voter

If I were black, I'd be offended by the following remark:

"The African American populations that spill over from Chicago are expected to favor Obama."*


For the past week I've been favoring posts about Barack Obama and sadly turning this blog into a slightly different version of my so-called political one (The Update). Sorry about that, folks, but it's probably going to continue.

Once again I find myself riveted to an article featured on the Washington Post website debating the outcome of the Presidential backing in the state of Indiana. First of all, I thought Indiana was a "red state," being that most of it is farmland. Then again the big cities do take precedence in both the general election and the interest of the candidates (not surprising). It's the same in Illinois; lots of farms, but Springfield and Chicago determine the outcome.

But the obvious bias toward Democratic voters in the largest cities of Indiana is not what bothers me. The statement "black people are expected to vote for Obama" does. (And I'm paraphrasing, but not much outside the quote itself.) Maybe I should re-phrase my opener: I'm not black, but I'm still offended by this comment!

To think, all this time the media (liberal) has been making it out that Obama's campaign is geared toward resolving issues of racial politics. And indeed his most recent "a better tomorrow" speech explicitly addressed racial issues in America. However, this sweeping generalization by WP journalist Anne E. Kornblut really takes the cake for blatant race-oriented political moves.

Maybe I'm just overly sensitive. After all, I actually like black people. I think our economy and education has shorted them, outright failing to meet the needs of a group historically plagued by poverty and instead has generally dismissed their voice. This is, of course, due to the failure of Democratic "leaders" in our government, who urge black people to become dependent on government funding so that they can never, ever end the cycle. And I'm sure if you asked the populace of black Americans you'd find a tenor similar to mine, that they want the same standards as every other citizen: properly maintained schools and educated educators, opportunities for employment outside the government realm, preventative care for children so that they might escape a (Democrat-induced) destiny to a life of failure.

My best guess on what they don't want? For some amatuer staff writer to casually mention that they- the whole of black Americans in the state of Indiana- are planning to vote for the black candidate.

So, I guess all black voters in Indiana want to vote for Obama. But is that because the Washington Post thinks that, of the few black Indianans that will make it to the polls, they are more likely to vote for Obama because his campaign promises fit their needs? Or is it actually just because the WP is assuming, despite everything that's happened in the last week with the Wright scandal, that black voters in Indiana just want a black man in office no matter what affiliations he has made in the past? Isn't that setting the bar a little low for black voters, and completely dismissing the reaction of the black Christian church to Obama's link to Wright?

Call me crazy, but I'd like to give black people a little more credit than that.



*Reference: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/24/AR2008032402359.html?hpid%3Dtopnews&sub=AR

Unofficially, it's "Obama Week"

More wisdom from our new hero....

"Faith doesn't mean that you don't have doubts.

You need to come to church in the first place precisely because you are first of this world, not apart from it. You need to embrace Christ precisely because you have sins to wash away - because you are human and need an ally in this difficult journey.

It was because of these newfound understandings that I was finally able to walk down the aisle of Trinity United Church of Christ on 95th Street in the Southside of Chicago one day and affirm my Christian faith. It came about as a choice, and not an epiphany. I didn't fall out in church. The questions I had didn't magically disappear. But kneeling beneath that cross on the South Side, I felt that I heard God's spirit beckoning me. I submitted myself to His will, and dedicated myself to discovering His truth.

That's a path that has been shared by millions upon millions of Americans - evangelicals, Catholics, Protestants, Jews and Muslims alike; some since birth, others at certain turning points in their lives. It is not something they set apart from the rest of their beliefs and values. In fact, it is often what drives their beliefs and their values. And that is why that, if we truly hope to speak to people where they're at - to communicate our hopes and values in a way that's relevant to their own - then as progressives, we cannot abandon the field of religious discourse.
"

My Favorite Politician

Click the link below to hear inspiring words from our nation's favorite new politician. Oops, did I mean "favorite new" or "new favorite?" I can't remember, he's just so darn appealing my words get mixed up! Gee whiz, I sure would like to shake his hand!

Obama's Tuesday "More Perfect Union" speech

What I Am Learning About Christ This Week

"
Directly after Adam and Eve sinned, the Bible records certain "first words", words that were never heard before. Here are a few of them:

*Naked-- Then the eyes of both were opened, and they knew that they were naked. And they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loincloths" (Genesis 3:7)

*Pain--"To the woman he said, ‘I will surely multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children" (Genesis 3:16).

*Cursed--"And to Adam he said, ‘Because you have listened to the voice of your wife and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you, 'You shall not eat of it,' cursed is the ground because of you; in pain you shall eat of it all the days of your life;'" (Genesis 3:17).

*Thorns--"thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you; and you shall eat the plants of the field" (Genesis 3:18).

*Sweat--"By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return" (Genesis 3:19).

*Sword--"He drove out the man, and at the east of the garden of Eden he placed the cherubim and a flaming sword that turned every way to guard the way to the tree of life" (Genesis 3:24).

*Death--"Thus all the days that Adam lived were 930 years, and he died" (Genesis 5:5).

These words indicate the extent of the curse that it not only rested on Adam and Eve, but also on the creation itself.


--------Now compare with Jesus Christ's time before, during and after being crucified--------

• Naked: "And they stripped Him..." (Matthew 27:28).
  
  

• Pain: "For they persecute him whom you have struck down, and they recount the pain of those you have wounded" (Psalm 69:26). Jesus endured horrible pain and suffering on the cross, that Revelation 21:4 might come to pass: "He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning nor crying nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away."
  
  

• Cursed: We noted from Galatians 3:13 that Jesus "became a curse for us" for "a hanged man is cursed by God."
  
  

• Thorns: "and twisting together a crown of thorns, they put it on his head and put a reed in his right hand. And kneeling before him, they mocked him, saying, "Hail, King of the Jews!" (Matthew 27:29). What deep meaning the crown of thorns has. As He was lifted up on that cross, His brow encircled with thorns, Jesus Christ was bearing the curse for us.
  
  

• Sweat: And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly; and his sweat became like great drops of blood falling down to the ground" (Luke 22:44).
  
  

• Sword: "But one of the soldiers pierced his side with a spear, and at once there came out blood and water" (John 19:34). Just like an angel blocked Adam and Eve from entering paradise again by a sword, so the way to paradise was opened up by the sword that shed Jesus' blood. He said to the thief on the cross next to him, "...today you will be with Me in paradise" (Luke 23:43).
  
  

• Death: "When the perishable puts on the imperishable, and the mortal puts on immortality, then shall come to pass the saying that is written: "Death is swallowed up in victory." "O death, where is your victory? O death, where is your sting?" The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ." (1 Corinthians 15:54-57)."
  "
  

Material taken from The Cross Bible study, SettingCaptivesFree.com

Favorite photo of the week!

Because you can't possibly have heard enough about Paris Hilton this week, here's the latest!
Yup, that's her meeting with an ascetic of unknown origin. Presumably he's enlightening her to going back to her natural hair color? One can only pray.

copyright msn.com entertainment 2008

To write the love of God above

The love of God is greater far than tongue or pen can ever tell;
It goes beyond the highest star, and reaches to the lowest hell;
The guilty pair, bowed down with care, God gave His Son to win;
His erring child He reconciled, and pardoned from his sin.

Could we with ink the ocean fill, and were the skies of parchment made,
Were every stalk on earth a quill, and every man a scribe by trade,
To write the love of God above, would drain the ocean dry.
Nor could the scroll contain the whole, though stretched from sky to sky.

I didn't write this, because I couldn't.

In his own words: Obama on gay marriage and its legalization

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (BP)--Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama sought the support of voters in the homosexual community Feb. 28, telling them in a letter that if elected president he would work to pass laws important to that constituency and would use the "bully pulpit" to urge states to grant same-sex couples the legal benefits of marriage.

The 770-word letter was posted on a section of Obama's campaign website devoted to homosexual issues. He and Hillary Clinton have worked for months to get the votes of the homosexual community, even appearing in August at a historic Democratic presidential forum devoted solely to homosexual issues.

In the letter, Obama touted his past record on such issues and said he would continue that record if elected. He used the acronym LGBT -- which stands for "lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender" -- six times.

"As your President, I will use the bully pulpit to urge states to treat same-sex couples with full equality in their family and adoption laws," he wrote. "I personally believe that civil unions represent the best way to secure that equal treatment. But I also believe that the federal government should not stand in the way of states that want to decide on their own how best to pursue equality for gay and lesbian couples -- whether that means a domestic partnership, a civil union, or a civil marriage.

"He once again said he backs the "complete repeal" of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), a law passed in 1996 that gives states the option of not recognizing another state's "gay marriages." It also prohibits the federal government from recognizing "gay marriage." Ever since it was passed homosexual activists have viewed it as a significant legal barrier to nationwide legalization of "gay marriage."

"While some say we should repeal only part of the law, I believe we should get rid of that statute altogether," he wrote. "Federal law should not discriminate in any way against gay and lesbian couples, which is precisely what DOMA does.

"Austin Nimocks, an attorney with the Alliance Defense Fund, a legal organization that supports the Defense of Marriage Act, said overturning DOMA "would lead to the recognition of everything the homosexual agenda stands for, including same-sex marriage."

"A repeal of DOMA would mean that the federal government is acknowledging and supporting same-sex couples, and that would be in Arizona and everywhere else," Nimocks told Baptist Press. "And it would start with the extension of certain federal benefits, the filing of joint tax returns by same-sex returns, and it would chip away at the institution of marriage in every state -- and most egregiously in those states that have voted through a constitutional amendment or a law to protect marriage between one man and one woman."

In the years since DOMA was signed into law, more than 40 states have passed various types of laws prohibiting "gay marriage," including 27 that have passed constitutional marriage amendments. "To suggest that DOMA in some form or fashion prevents states from fashioning their own marriage law is just disingenuous at best," Nimocks said. "To repeal DOMA means that every American taxpayer would be forced to fund the homosexual agenda."

Obama also said he supports "age-appropriate sex education that includes information about contraception" and favors lifting "the federal ban on needle exchange[s]." During a September Democratic debate he said he would be comfortable with teachers reading to second graders a children's book, King & King, supportive of "gay marriage."

In the letter he asserted that in multiple forums -- talking to rural farmers or to Baptist parishioners -- he has talked about the need to "fight homophobia." "I believe that we can achieve the goal of full equality for the millions of LGBT people in this country," he said. "To do that, we need leadership that can appeal to the best parts of the human spirit. Join with me, and I will provide that leadership. Together, we will achieve real equality for all Americans, gay and straight alike."

Obama also mentioned in the letter his speech in 2006 during an HIV/AIDS conference at Saddleback Church, where Rick Warren pastors. At the time Warren released a statement saying he disagrees with Obama on abortion and other issues.